> From: Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> > STARK, BARBARA H <bs7...@att.com> wrote: > >> From: Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> > >> > >> In the ADD WG, Barbara STARK, BARBARA H <bs7...@att.com> wrote: > >> > [BHS] While my ISP requires me to use the CE router they supply, I’ve > >> > never had an issue connecting that to my own router and then > running > >> my > >> > home network from my router. The CE router from my particular ISP > >> > (YMMV) even automatically passes on the public IPv4 address it > acquires > >> > and a /64 IPv6 prefix to my router (so IPv4 just has the single NAT > and > >> > IPv6 works great). I have total ability to choose any router I want > and > >> > configure that router as much as that router vendor’s GUI allows > (e.g., > >> > >> 1) Does your ISP provides router auto-detect that there is another > router > >> behind > >> it, and turn itself into a modem only? or did you have configure that? > > > The ISP router auto-detects the presence of a router on its LAN and > > uses a capture screen to ask the user if they want the ISP router to go > > into "IPv4 passthrough" mode. The ISP router does not become a > > This is very cool. > Is it written up as a specification somewhere? What is the signal that the > device behind is a router, and not a PC?
It's sort of written up in https://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/download/TR-124_Issue-5.pdf. Search for LAN.ADDRESS and go to 6. There are related requirements that reference "LAN.ADDRESS.6". Auto detection of routers behind the ISP CE router is imperfect (which is why manual configuration exists), but usually right. I forget what it is the ISP CE router sees that triggers it to think there is a router connecting to it. I'm thinking it could be some DHCPv4 options that routers tend to ask for but regular hosts don't; but I could be mis-remembering. Auto-detection isn't described in TR-124. > Why isn't homenet standardizing this? Reason 1: This is an IPv4 thing. Why would homenet or IETF standardize an IPv4 thing since IPv4 is historic? Reason 2: The functionality is accomplished within the ISP CE router without anything else needing to do anything special. No need to define requirements to accomplish interoperability. So the ISPs who knowingly wanted this functionality defined it in TR-124 because they use TR-124 to help with CE router RFPs. These ISPs perceive no additional benefit from the effort required to create an IETF RFC. > > PPPoE is only legacy (old ADSL). The IPv4 passthrough does work there > > (because the ISP router is still a router, as described above). IPv6 on > > legacy is 6rd with a /60 -- so the IPv6 stuff is different. Fiber, > > VDSL, and Gfast (and some newer ADSL) are IPoE (PTM), and not IP o > > PPPoE o ATM. > > Nobody has told Bell Canada the PPPoE is legacy :-) LOL. You were asking about AT&T. For AT&T it's legacy. I realize it's still widely used around the world. Your Network May Vary. Barbara _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
